On Tue, 2010-02-02 at 05:13 -0800, Daniel R. wrote:
> Hi All,
> we get a lot of Spam with some bad Words in the Display name of the sender.
> With the blacklist_from command it is possible to filter by email-address,
> but what is the right notation for filtering the display name of the sender?
>
this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/SA-Blacklist-for-Display-Names--tp27420107p27420107.html
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On Samstag, 21. November 2009 Matt Kettler wrote:
> SA-blacklist and sa-blacklist-uri are both dead as far as use within
> SpamAssassin goes.
Thank you for your answer, Matt. I have to apologize, I forgot to
mention that I do not use that list in SA, for the reasons you listed.
Instead,
ist.stearns.org: Connection
> timed out (110)
>
> So I had a look if something changed on
> http://www.sa-blacklist.stearns.org/sa-blacklist/
> but obviously the information there is quite old: If I download the "sa-
> blacklist.current.reject", it has a version of A
ct to rsync.sa-blacklist.stearns.org: Connection
> timed out (110)
do you use it at postfix level as regex filter?
> So I had a look if something changed on
> http://www.sa-blacklist.stearns.org/sa-blacklist/
> but obviously the information there is quite old: If I download the "
I had a look if something changed on
http://www.sa-blacklist.stearns.org/sa-blacklist/
but obviously the information there is quite old: If I download the "sa-
blacklist.current.reject", it has a version of April: 200904171539
while my last rsync version is 200910142031
Any chance for a fix
Robert Fitzpatrick wrote:
> Having process load issues, I found that removing my two sa-blacklist
> rules took care of it. If fact, very good processing times now that
> they're gone. My question is, what I'm I missing? Spam filtering is
> doing a fine job since change
Having process load issues, I found that removing my two sa-blacklist
rules took care of it. If fact, very good processing times now that
they're gone. My question is, what I'm I missing? Spam filtering is
doing a fine job since changes applied 24 hours ago.
I run Postfix 2.2.8 with a
p://www.sa-blacklist.stearns.org/sa-blacklist/random.current.cf
CF_FILE=random.current.cf
CF_NAME=William Stearn's RANDOM WORD Ruleset
PARSE_NEW_VER_SCRIPT=grep -i '^#release' | tail -1
CF_MUNGE_SCRIPT=
Old random.current.cf already existed
in /usr/local/etc/mail/spamassassin/RulesDuJour...
Retrievin
Good evening, all,
This is a (shortened) repost of a sincere request to anyone using
any of the sa-blacklist files. The URLs to those files have changed;
please update your URLs in any automated download scripts. if you're
using RulesDuJour, please get the latest version as Chri
Good afternoon, Chris,
On Mon, 19 Sep 2005, Chris Thielen wrote:
William Stearns wrote:
(Summary - the sa-blacklist content is moving to new machines. If
you're downloading any of the 15 versions of this list, you'll need to
change the hostname you use in your download; see
William Stearns wrote:
Good day, all,
(Summary - the sa-blacklist content is moving to new machines. If
you're downloading any of the 15 versions of this list, you'll need to
change the hostname you use in your download; see "What you need to
do" below for instru
Good day, all,
(Summary - the sa-blacklist content is moving to new machines. If
you're downloading any of the 15 versions of this list, you'll need to
change the hostname you use in your download; see "What you need to do"
below for instructions.)
I had a chat w
or
URIDNSBL SpamAssassin plugins, or any other software that can
check message body domains against a name-based RBL. Data for the
second SURBL ws.surbl.org comes from the domains in Bill Stearns'
SpamAssassin blacklist: sa-blacklist. This is a large list of
spam domains, including those found in
2 times on THAT day!
The daily average is normally 400.
I'm using the rule /etc/mail/spamassassin/65_sa-blacklist.cf with a daily
(04hAM) update from
URL=http://www.stearns.org/sa-blacklist/sa-blacklist.current
Of course, the entries of this file is NOW correct
I'm assuming that,
15 matches
Mail list logo
